Thanks, Andrew, his email's there, just after the phone/fax.....
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Andrew Lockley <[email protected]> Date: Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 5:08 AM Subject: Re: [geo] Re: Jim Hansen : 1 to 2DegC and 20m sea level rise To: nathan currier <[email protected]> Can you send that to the list? It was useful Do you have that chaps email address? A On 25 Jul 2011 05:41, "nathan currier" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, Andrew - > > Thanks. I didn't really just mean one paper, although I'm attaching one > GMI/GMF policy brief that pretty much lays it all out. > > I'm not an insider to what's going on, but last October the EPA re-chartered > its Methane to Markets (M2M) program, clearly with an eye to the fact > that Robert Watson had started his "Global Methane Fund" (GMF) at the time > of Copenhagen. So, now it's all together called the "Global Methane > Initiative", and involves the idea of Watson's Fund, which might actually > become part of IMF or World Bank, as a financial vehicle to enact projects > of M2M. > > A key concept to make it all work is an enticement for investors - a carbon > price floor, currently planned at $12/tn CO2e. Thus if the carbon price went > lower the fund would cover the losses of investors. They'll need to have > some $300 million to be able to make this work, I believe. Then their fund > has to get leveraged dramatically. Further, they are aiming to change > certain key rules at the CDM (clean development mechanism) which have > clearly impeded investment in methane projects. > > The whole goal of GMI now is to get ~50% of <$40/tn cost bracket CH4 > emissions out by 2020. I'd have to look up what that translates to in actual > amounts, but I know that while it's better than most multi-gas > "comprehensive" GHG reduction plans (which all are hobbled by the 100 yr > GWP), it's not more than 1/2 of what would be practical if the money were > just there up front and had to be somehow repaid. I think it translates to > something like 10-15% of current anthropogenic emissions (whereas one third > is practical). > > Although not all trapped methane is usable, a total leveraging of 2x-3x is > very modest (I think in a carbon market of $14/tn, the usable trapped CH4 > for energy in an expanded M2M program would be worth something like $8 > billion/yr, and the current total leveraging rate for all of M2M is ~7x-8x), > so if major governments could be be persuaded to each put in small amounts, > the total of $80-120 Bn could clearly be found. This would give a much > better result. > > Remember that you have to do more than the growth rate to really feel much > of a reversal. Methane was flat for a while but clearly going up again now, > and CH4 growth rate might be as much as ~+30 Mmt/yr now. So it really needs > to be done very quickly to give a strong signal & feel any temporary healing > of the arctic. > > For your emergency methane meeting in October, which I think is exciting (I > really wish I could be there, at least to observe): when I mentioned "mixing > things up", I mean that things developed there for trapping methane in an > emergency might end up having a big value, too, on the emissions side of > things & help the viability of the kind of thing I'm talking about, adding > more profitability & hence a more rapid draw-down to emissions. > > But, of course, the cross-over aspect could also work the opposite > direction. Speaking of which, do you folks know of Robert Hayes in Alberta? > I had once stumbled upon some of his papers & looked him up & talked with > him a little. His stuff is for the trapping of CH4 emissions in a natural > gas business context, but might be applicable for emergencies. He's gotten > some large grants from Canadian gas & oil, etc. The idea is to be able to > sustain a reaction at very low concentration of methane - I think only about > 1%. Thus in some of the things you've all written about, using some trapped > methane to run other mechanisms to oxygenate the water column or whatever, > his technology would vastly expand the ability to do such things.......I've > pasted his contact info below...... > > > All best, Nathan > > > > Dr. Robert E. Hayes, P.Eng. > > *[image: Robert Hayes]* > > *Professor* > 7th floor ECERF, Room 7-070F > 9107 - 116 Street > Edmonton, AB T6G 2V4 > *Phone:* 780.492.3571 > *Fax:* 780.492.2881 > Email <[email protected]> > > *Research Areas:* Catalytic combustion, environmental catalysis, > computational transport phenomena > > Current research interests involve the application of finite element > computational fluid dynamics techniques to systems involving heat and mass > transfer, chemical reactions and porous media. > > *Research Interests:* > > - Modelling of catalytic reactors for catalytic combustion > - Mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions of methane > - Catalytic destruction of BTEX compounds > - Automotive catalytic converters > > *Current research projects* > > - Catalytic solutions for the mitigation of fugitive emissions: the oil > and gas sector accounts for a significant amount of the greenhouse gases > emitted in Canada. Much of these are in the form of fugitive emissions of > methane that occur during the development and transportation of oil and > natural gas. In this project, reactor technologies are being developed to > enable the catalytic combustion of these emissions. Becuase methane has 23 > times the GHG potential of carbon dioxide, combustion of the methane results > in a net reduction of GHG gases. Furthermore, recovery of otherwise wasted > heat can further improve GHG reductions. A significant portion of the work > involves computer aided design with experimental verification. This project > is supported by NSERC, COURSE, NRCan, New Paradigm Engineering Ltd. and > Scott-Can Industries. > > > > > On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Andrew Lockley <[email protected] >wrote: > >> Good post, I read it carefully. >> >> Can I have the paper on fugitive methane business models ? >> >> Thanks >> >> A >> On 24 Jul 2011 22:30, "Nathan Currier" <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > > > -- > Nathan Currier > 108 Ellwood Street, #43 > New York, NY 10040 > 401-954-3402 > www.nathankindcurrier.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
